Socialist Platform meeting – Saturday September 14, 1pm. The Meeting Place, 2 Langley Lane, London SW8.
- This topic has 38 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 3 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
gnome wrote:Apparently, Grand Central Terminal in New York has 44 platforms; even good old Waterloo has 19….
haha
Report on the meeting by those who drew up the "Socialist Platform" here:http://www.independentsocialistnetwork.org/?p=2470What unscrupulous political operators the so-called "CPGB" are. True Leninists !
Quote:“Neither capitalism nor its state apparatus can be made to work in the interests of the mass of the population. The rule of the working class requires a state to defend itself, but a state that is withering away, a semi state.” Indicatively agreed 20 –16 & 7 abstentionsI suspect this is back to the "workers state" just phrased differently…And what is all this "motivated" what was wrong with simply saying "moved"
Dear oh dear. Going into a party full of praise then bloc-voting as another party. Not so much divided loyalties as ulterior loyalties. Tut tut. Wonder how many groups are bloc voting clandestinely or secretly caucusing beforehand.
Here is our name check in those excluded from the 'Socialist Platform' meeting and a report of the vote against observers which at least CPGB members seem to have voted againsthttp://cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/978/socialist-platform-politics-of-prejudice
More "CPGB" celebration of their wrecking of the "Socialist Platform" by "Leninising" it and showing internal disruption:http://www.cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/978/socialist-platform-leaders-headlong-collapse-into-politics-of-the-labour-bureaucracyAlso here:http://www.cpgb.org.uk/home/weekly-worker/978/cpgb-debating-left-unity-alternativesI know some comrades like the Weekly Worker because it will always publish letters from us (as in this issue, it so happens) but in my opinion they are the most despicable of all Leninist groups What they have done here is a classic application of their (and the trotskyists') tactic of entering another group, trying to take it over, and then withdrawing having picked up a few new members. In fact, in the second article above Mike McNair openly exposes this dishonest and unprincipled approach:
Quote:He concluded that, although Left Unity is a project which is going nowhere, is obsessed with political correctness and is politically insubstantial, the CPGB nonetheless ought to go through this experience and attempt to win people over.What happened at the meeting illustrates what is likely to happen at the Left Party's founding conference on 30 November and after as the various Leninist entryist groups follow this tactic and slog it out amongst each other (not the call at this meeting by the "CPGB" to exclude another, rival group). I must confess, though, that I didn't think this would happen so soon. It seems I underestimated the machiavellism of the "CPGB".
Wouldn't the classic application of the Trot tactic of entryism be more clandestine? I suspect other groups are doing this with more subterfuge.
The "CPGB" are not Trotskyists of course but "Leninists" even "post-Stalinists". They seem to be applying Lenin's dictum concerning the leaders of the Labour Party — support "like a rope supports a hanged man" — to all other organisations. I'm sure that if we were bigger we would have to find ways of keeping them out. Be interesting to see what both the "Socialist Platform" and the new "Left Unity" party do about them.The Lenin quote comes from his 1920 polemic Leftwing Communism: An Infantile Disorder.
ALB wrote:I'm sure that if we were bigger we would have to find ways of keeping them out.If we were bigger then correspondingly parties like the CPGB would be smaller surely. In any event why would they want to infiltrate us? What would be in it, literally, for them?
ALB wrote:In fact, in the second article above Mike McNair openly exposes this dishonest and unprincipled approach:Quote:He concluded that, although Left Unity is a project which is going nowhere, is obsessed with political correctness and is politically insubstantial, the CPGB nonetheless ought to go through this experience and attempt to win people over.What's wrong with trying to win people over? Wouldn't we attempt to do the same given the right opportunities?
Quote:As the CPGB amendment puts it, “Our ultimate aim is a society based on the principle of ‘From each according to their abilities; to each according to their needs’. A moneyless, classless, stateless society, within which each individual can develop their fullest individuality” (Manson's emphasis). This inspiring vision should be a central tenet for all revolutionary socialists and Marxists.Notwithstanding the inclusion of the 'U' word, this statement represents a sizeable step forward insofar as a correct and coherent definiton of socialism is being given outside of our own circles, by leftists of all people, which only a few years ago would have been virtually unthinkable.
We wouldn't try to win people over under the pretence that we agree with them when we don't. I think this is the problem with the CPGB. And it would be a problem if any prospective infiltrators went after the assets of the SPGB as happened with the old CPGB. Pretty sure 'socialists' of all sorts of stripes have said their 'ultimate' aim is as described above.
Gnome asks why would they want to infiltrate us? What would be in it, literally, for them? I can think of two reasons , the control of a healthy bank balance and prestigious premises.
alanjjohnstone wrote:Gnome asks why would they want to infiltrate us? What would be in it, literally, for them? I can think of two reasons , the control of a healthy bank balance and prestigious premises.That wasn't what I had in mind. They may be (are, in fact) unscrupulous political operators but they are not common crooks (besides, they seem to have plenty of money of their own, from their leaders' private fortunes). I was thinking more of a political raid to see if they could pick up some of our then members who might have doubts about our policy, say, on parliament or reforms.
alanjjohnstone wrote:Gnome asks why would they want to infiltrate us? What would be in it, literally, for them?I can think of two reasons , the control of a healthy bank balance and prestigious premises.Then what's to stop that happening now? It would be far easier to infiltrate the party now for the sake of acquiring " a healthy bank balance and prestigious premises" than when we are larger.
ALB wrote:That wasn't what I had in mind. They may be (are, in fact) unscrupulous political operators but they are not common crooks (besides, they seem to have plenty of money of their own, from their leaders' private fortunes). I was thinking more of a political raid to see if they could pick up some of our then members who might have doubts about our policy, say, on parliament or reforms.The only problem with that rather fanciful scenario is that our members have not joined simply by signing their name on a dotted line. Very few members who join the SPGB subsequently have those sort of doubts. Most have already been there; done that and got the T-shirt…
ALB wrote “That wasn’t what I had in mind. They may be (are, in fact) unscrupulous political operators but they are not common crooks (besides, they seem to have plenty of money of their own, from their leaders’ private fortunes).”I think you’re mixing up the CPGB (Weekly Worker) lot with the CPB (Morning Star) – one of whose leaders got a fortune selling a painting http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2006/nov/10/otherparties.topstories3Unless you’re thinking of oldish internet rumours about the funding of the current CPGB (W.W.). and how one of their leaders is supposed to be heir to a laundry business! (Urban lefty myths No.500023798956)
Hello all,I'm a member of the steering committee of the Socialist Platform within Left Unity. I noticed the letters written into the CPGB's Weekly Worker by Adam Buick and Alan Johnstone, which seem to express interest in a discussion about similarities between our projects. I'd be more than happy for either Adam or Alan [or any other SPGB member] to email me as the point of contact for such discussions. My address is edmundpotts gmail com
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.